This blog is about spiritual awakening, maps and stages, the blinding effects of our strong momentum/conditioning (karmic propensities), view, realization, experience, etc. If you're new here, I recommend going through the 'Must Reads' articles (see sidebar). For discussions you are welcome to join the Awakening to Reality Facebook group

Translate

Ads 300 x 600

Recent Posts

This pointer is for those practicing self-inquiry. If you have already passed the I AM realization, there is no need to read this.

......

P:

Sometimes during practice a state of deep stillness and silence is maintained for an extended period. In such a state, is it better to abide in it, or is it better to continue to invoke the "before birth.., who am I" inquiry with intention?

I replied:

Continue inquiring. Both silence and thoughts are just passing states and are not the point. What is aware of silence and thoughts? What is undeniably existing and present in thoughtlessness? Who am I?

‘in the wrong direction. Nisargadatta Maharaj used to say, ‘Understanding is all’. In essence, Bob was saying, ‘Right now in your direct experience see what your real nature is. What are you right now? What have you always been?’ The thinking mind is useless for this because seeing or looking is not a conceptual function at all. It is more like seeing an apple in your hand. You just look, not think.
Right now, as you read this, you exist and you are aware that you exist. You are undoubtedly present and aware. Before the next thought arises, you are absolutely certain of the fact of your own being, your own awareness, your own presence. This awareness is what you are; it is what you always have been. All thoughts, perceptions, sensations and feelings appear within or upon that. This awareness does not move, change or shift at any time. It is always free and completely untouched. However, it is not a thing or an object that you can see or grasp. The mind, being simply thoughts arising in awareness, cannot grasp it or know it or even think about it. Yet, as Bob says, you cannot deny the fact of your own being. It is palpably obvious, and yet, from the time we were born, no one has pointed this out. Once it is pointed out it can be grasped or understood very quickly because it is just a matter of noticing, ‘Oh, that is what I am!’ It is a bright, luminous, empty, presence of awareness; it is absolutely radiant, yet without form; it is seemingly intangible, but the most solid fact in your existence; it is effortlessly here right now, forever untouched. Without taking a step, you have arrived; you are home. No practice can reveal this because practices are in time and in the mind. Practices aim at a result, but you (as presence-awareness) are here already, only you don’t recognize it till it is pointed out. Once seen, you can’t lose it, and you don’t have to practice to exist, to be. This is, in essence, what Bob pointed out to me in the first conversation I had with him
Once I saw this, I felt very clear and free immediately. Later, some thoughts came up, some old personality patterns, some old definitions of who I thought myself to be. I seemed to lose the clear understanding of my nature as presence-awareness. The next day, I talked to Bob about it. He said, ‘Let’s have a look. Do you exist? Are you aware? What is illumining the thought that you have lost it?’ Then I realized that thoughts of suffering were only passing concepts being illumined by the ever-present awareness. I hadn’t lost anything at all. The awareness that we are is never obscured! Suffering seems real because we don’t have a clear understanding of our true nature. Instead, we believe the passing thoughts, such as ‘I am no good,’ ‘I am not there yet,’ ‘I am stuck’ or whatever the thought may be. Eventually we understand that we are not those thoughts. Once our real self is pointed out, the suffering loses its grip.
Bob pointed out that there is no person here at all. The person that we think we are is an imaginary concept. There are thoughts and feelings and perceptions, but they are ‘

- John Wheeler

M: I had a similar question actually because i listened to Adyashanti talk and he says to rest in the silence, that the silence is the answer to the question Who am I. So a little different. But the silence doesn’t seem bright luminous presence etc so I need to keep inquiring. I replied:

Adyashanti said:

"...But whatever you are, you don’t disappear when you’re silent. The
world doesn’t disappear when you’re silent. The glass of water doesn’t
disappear when I stop thinking it’s a glass of water. The reality of
life actually exists whether we’re thinking about it or not. I think it
only takes those five seconds to see where most of us are actually
living our whole life.Does noticing silence mean we’re ignoring everything that doesn’t seem to exist when we’re in silence?The silence I’m talking about is the natural silence of awareness
before we go into a dreamy place, before we disconnect. It’s prior to
all that movement of mind. One of the things that I often emphasize when
teaching is that it has to be a vivid silence. If you feel spaced-out
and dreamy internally, it’s like you’re leaning too far back. And if you
just lean forward a little bit, it comes back into view."

There’s a website which speaks of silence this way.. or some people say space. Formless. But it’s the formlessness of the I AM and not just a silent state of mind

'The
Hebrew writer who penned this miracle of language, that that which is
unknowable, unnamable, immeasurable is that which is beyond all and
encompassing all, had a wonderful experience of Pure Silence in his or
her awareness to have come to this conclusion. You see, the unknowable
which is impossible to understand rationally or emotionally is being
ness itself and this being ness is a present tense verb. "Am" is what it
was and is called. Am is present, now, and since it is a verb it is not
subject or object, but rather action, the action of am-ing, or be-ing.
Our only semi-tangible way of imperfectly grasping this is by allowing
our awareness very subtly to focus on being itself and the brain can
only understand this as silent nothingness between and supporting
everything.

Pure Silence is simply experiencing
being as a witness, not as controller or doer or thinker but as
observer. There is tremendous freedom and peace in this. Where there is
peace, there is certitude and order. From the order comes wisdom and
inexplicable joy, which is the joy of discovery. The discovery is that
your am-ness is no different from the Elohim, from the am of God itself.
You are the chosen, we are the chosen because there is no choice to be
made for ourselves. We simply are, choicelessly, purely, resoundingly.

The Psalmist calls us to be still and know that we are. Stop right
now and recognize your true identity, your being ness which is being
itself. No matter what you have done, thought or believed, all that is
completely secondary to the fact that you are and what you are is God,
which is Pure Silence itself.

Isn't that a comforting thought for a rainy, dark night?

Shalom!'

M: It seems like when there is silence of thought and I keep inquiring then other phenomena start occurring like hearing loud hissing almost like locusts or feeling energetic phenomena. Can be distracting lol. I need to keep going. In a week I’m doing silent retreat with Adya. Hopefully will breakthrough to IAM then. That’s my goal.

I replied: (Thumbs up)

Any phenomena can become another opportunity to inquire and isn’t a hindrance. I.e. Trace back the radiance (from a sound, a perception, a sensation, etc) by inquiring into its Source.

Chinul: What has just asked me this question is precisely your mind of
void and calm, numinous awareness. Why not trace back its radiance rather
than search for it outside? For your benefit I will now point straight to
your original mind so that you can awaken to it. Clear your minds and
listen to my words.

From morning until evening, all during the 12 periods of the day, during
all your actions and activities - whether seeing, hearing, laughing,
talking, whether angry of happy, whether doing evil or good - utlimately who
is it that is able to perform all these actions? Speak! If you say that it
is the physical body which is acting, then at the moment when a man's life
comes to an end, even though the body has not yet decayed, how is it that
the eyes cannot see, the ears cannot hear, the nose cannot smell, the tongue
cannot talk, the hands cannot grasp, the feet cannot run?

You should know that
what is capable of seeing, hearing, moving and acting has to be your original
mind; it is not your physical body. Furthermore, the four elements which
make up the physical body are by nature void; they are like images in a
mirror of the moon's reflection in water. How can they be clear and constantly
aware, always bright and never obscured - and, upon activation, be able to put into
operation sublime functions as numerous as the sands of the Ganges? For this reason
it is said: "Drawing water and carrying firewood are spiritual powers and sublime
functions."

There are many points at which to enter the noumenon. I will indicate one
approach which will allow you to return to the source.

Chinul: Do you hear the sound sof that crow cawing and that magpie calling?

Student: Yes.

Chinul: Trace them back and listen to your hearing-nature. Do you hear any sounds?

Student: At that place, sound and discrimination do not obtain.

Chinul: Marvelous! Marvelous! This is Avalokitesvara's method for entering the noumenon.
Let me ask you again. You said that sounds and discrimination do not obtain at that
place. But since they do not obtain, isn't the hearing-nature just empty space at
such a time?

Student: Originally it is not empty. It is always bright and never obscured.

According to the biography here, he was ordained under Ven. Buddhadhasa: https://www.amazon.com/Sandy-Path-Near-Lake-Khemananda/dp/1443872555#reader_1443872555An Extemporaneous
Talk to the Singapore Zen Group
by (Phra) Kovit Khemananda
February 1981I want to say that
I am impressed when all of you turn to face the wall, to confront the wall,
to confront your own doubt. When I flew to Singapore, I met a Slav on the plane
and he said to me that he feels very deeply about Buddhism. And I asked him
why he felt that way. He said, “Buddhism is close to life.” All of
us here are interested in Buddhism I think, and I feel that without observing
our mind, our own mind, there is no Buddhism. Please don’t look at me as
a toy of culture. Now what do I mean, “a toy of culture”? It means
that you want to hear me, a Buddhist monk, a Thai Buddhist monk who has come
to talk to you about this and that — and I think that is not Buddhism.
It is only culture. When we talk about Buddhism, we must talk about the mind.
When we talk about the mind, can we find any person in the mind? It is very
strange when we talk about the mind, it means we do not talk about anything
else. A lot of you have probably experienced going abroad, crossing a mountain,
or going to many countries. But can we cross our sensation, can we go beyond
our senses? This is a problem of Buddhism. And I think it is a problem for mankind.
Can we go beyond our sensation? When you became
a Buddhist or non-Buddhist, you became so by making sense. When you consider
our sensation, it means that we try to observe a thing directly. From our opinions,
we try to realize our own mind, and that means the world; we try to communicate
our mind directly, and so communication is a tremendous problem. How can we
take a look at a person, people, a Singaporean, a Thai? We look to a thing to
follow the meaning and judge it. Now suppose you take a look a little farther:
You take many, many things with you when you look at a thing; you memorize the
name and so on...and so every moment we try to turn this little world into memorization.
As soon as I take a look at a person, I just create, judging, “Is he a
good man? Is he a Buddhist or not?” And that standard, that criteria, belongs
to me. So when we take a look at a flower, or the sun and moon, or the electric
lamp, I define myself as the observer of that thing….How can we observe
our own sensation? And the method for observing our own mind or external objects
is a problem. When I observe a thing, let's consider this deeply, closely...when
I observe a cup of tea like this, is the cup of tea a specific object on its
own? It’s only the name and form of it in my memory, right? Let us say
I’m thinking about the cup of tea, but the pure essence is quite different
isn’t it?...or the moon, the sun, or the flower...the flower is the flower
in itself, or we memorize it to be a flower. So, for me, it is very important
to realize this thing first. Things are, everything
is, because of the mind. If you have no mind, I mean if you die now, nothing
exists, does it? It’s your world, because; this world is a world of perception,
isn't it? Enjoy all the world, because after you die, the world belongs to the
others. The sun and the moon are still the sun and the moon in my own perception
and yours. And before we were born, was there any sun or moon in the world,
the perception world? No. So the moon is the moon when I am a person who observes
the moon, right? All of you must have studied about love or compassion (karuna),
action and the reason for it. When you define a person who does anything, please
take care of this, in every event we define a person who does something, a person
is a consequence of a definition, doing something in some case in some time.
But the self-nature does not depend on time, right? Most of the Buddhists that
I have ever met, they act, they use themselves like the artist who wants to
inspire himself in some time, in some place. I mean the artist is an artist
sometimes, not all the time. When he picks up his brush and then he paints,
he feels, “I am an artist,” but after that, maybe he turns to be a
merchant or someone else. So the person depends on time, but self-nature can
be beyond time. When you observe your breathing in and out, does the breathing
in and out belong to you? Is there any person
who breathes in-and-out? Can you say that the breathing in and out of the Prime
Minister is quite different from you? It is just the breathing in and out, isn’t
it? Have you ever observed your eye blinking naturally, beyond your desire,
beyond your need, beyond your decision? The moment of time we move,...art,...breathing
in and out, our mind grows every day and night, right? So when we say we are
Buddhists, that is our person; we want to socialize, collectivize, or presume
to be. Because of this action, because of this part, we can communicate with
the other Buddhists. So the Buddhist and the one who realizes his own mind is
quite different too. Some Buddhists can’t realize their own mind, but the
non-Buddhist can. So what is Buddhism? When we talk about
Buddhism, we talk about the realization of our own mind. Without the realization
of our own mind, for me, there is no Buddhism; it is only the toy of culture,
the prey or culture. So, come closer to the point, most of the time when we
talk about Buddhism, we point to sila (discipline), samadhi (meditation),
or pañña (wisdom). When we talk about sila, what
does it mean? Normally, it means the five precepts of the layman, or ten precepts
of the novice, and 227 of the monk. That is not the real discipline. In the
time of the Buddha, one monk couldn’t practice sila, because he
mentioned to the Buddha that even though he tried to remember, he couldn’t
— a lot of sila, a lot of vinaya. So he wanted to disrobe
right away. But the Buddha mentioned, “Oh, Bhikkhu, can you observe just
one thing?” The monk said, “Oh, if there is only one rule, I can stay
in the monkhood.” So the Buddha himself said, “Bhikkhu, just observe
your mind. This is the one discipline for you.”Soon after that
that monk gained enlightenment. So, what does it mean, sila or precepts?
Let us consider five precepts very common to you, very familiar to you. I do
not want to boast that I have a lot of sila, because I do not divide
sila into categories one, two, three, four, or five. But let us consider “Do
not kill.” Is it enough to be a Buddhist by not killing many people in
this world? Many people never kill anything, even the ones who have no consciousness,
or the one who stays in.a hospital for five or ten years and never kills anything.
But all precepts, the essence of it is love. Love is an inner discipline. When
you have love, you have the whole discipline, and the whole vinaya too. If I
love you, then I do not fear you, and do not kill you nor do any harm to people
or things. So the real vinaya is very
wide, right? You know samadhi,
we talk a lot about samadhi, but some monasteries will teach you to stop
your thought. And my master, my beloved teacher, mentioned that to stop your
own thought is to kill yourself, because a stone does not think anything, right?
That is very good for going into a trance, but if you take a look at the cup
of tea, without thinking anything, that is a trance, but you have no wisdom.
So, the master told his disciples to arouse sensation and thought by walking,
just to see what is what. And meditation is not the way to control the mind.
My opinion is not to control the mind. How can you control the mind? When you
control your mind, you have a lot of problems. Why do you want to try and control
it? What is your purpose for controlling your mind? A lot of students in Thailand
come to me and ask me, “Please teach me how to control my mind, concentrate,
and meditate.” And I ask them, “Why do you want to control your mind?”
And actually they say, “I don't know…[laughter]...because everyone
teaches us to control our minds.” Why do you want to control your mind,
for what purpose? If you say you can’t study so well so you want to control
your mind, do you think that by controlling your mind you will be able to increase
your studying? And mostly — take a look — our common sense daily mind
comes from the desire to control our mind. When you sit in
meditation, you make a conflict suddenly, immediately, because when you sit
in meditation you desire meditative effect. When you go to church you feel or
you have the sense that I am a suffering person, I have suffering in my mind
and I want to have some lesson so I can gain happiness. So you define the true
person at the same time, and that is our problem, isn’t it? When we practice
meditation, we define that I am the one who sits here and hopes to gain meditative
effect. And after ten minutes, or half an hour, time takes place in your life.
And what is time? Time is a person, right? When you stay in time for a certain
duration, you have the feeling of a person who suffers, and you separate, discriminate,
samsara from nirvana. In this case, as long as you discriminate, you increase
your person. Some people desire emancipation or extinction of suffering. So
when they sit in meditation, they let their mind be distracted and hope for
something — and then they fear, right? But let me come
to the point; when the Buddha teaches you about no person in you...in the Theravadin
sect, the first time when I came to be ordained, the master told me (and actually
he tells every monk who comes to be ordained) “You must observe that there
is no person in you, just only a movement, an element, a pure element in you.”
But we come to Buddhism, tradition, and we try to philosophize about the Buddha’s
teachings. For ten years, I tried to philosophize and contain my mind with this,
but when I met my beloved teacher, he proved that I was wrong. He said stop
reading books and just observe your mind sitting passively — do nothing
in meditation. Even though I sit in meditation to calm my mind for five minutes,
he would come and he would walk and disturb my mind. At first, I still did not
see anything....I was confused. Because he said in his teachings — and
this was very strange — meditation in his sense means just to observe our
own mind passively and vitality will come to us. What is vitality? When we discriminate
a person in time, we lose vitality. You suffer and fear comes to you, doesn’t
it? When we look at something, we sense something, actually we sense our personhood.
We confirm and confirm, time to time, to one person who is the observer. And
the observer is the one who does something in some time and some place, and
speculates to the other person who must accept the fruit of action. And then
the law of government takes place, and our sensation is fear.
It seems to me that fear is the result of sensation, especially sensuality or
sensualism. When we make sense of something, we discriminate a person and then
we fear missing something. Again, can we go beyond our sensation? If we can
go beyond our sensation, we can go beyond fear. We can go beyond the person,
we can go beyond discrimination, can’t we? So, for the arbitrator in this
case we must turn to movement. Consider movement, and then we can come to the
meaning of meditation and wisdom. What is movement? When you passively observe
the pure functioning world of your sense organ, then you can store up vitality,
and that is meditation. Because you can observe your mind, how it works, how
thoughts come and go, but when you try to stop the thought, how can you see
anything? How can you see the pure functioning world of the organism or sense
organ? Most of the Buddhists in Thailand, as far as I know, think that meditation
is to stop the sense organ. That is death, isn't it?Once a brahmin
came to the Buddha and asked him “How do you practice Dhamma?” And
the Buddha himself said, “I practice dhamma
by sitting, walking, standing, and lying down.” So the brahmins laughed
at him, and said, “The layman practices like you; they walk and they sit
and they lie down, and why do you say that you practice Dhamma in this way?”
But then the Buddha said that, “By sitting, I know just sitting, and when
I walk, I just walk, and when I lie down, I just lie down.” This seems
to us very mystical. Once the Buddha taught a very special person, he put a
question to the Buddha when the Buddha went collecting alms in the market near
a village, “Oh, my Lord, please tell me the way to practice. Give me a
very short saying aboutpractice.” Buddha said, “It is not the time
for teaching Dhamma, it is the time for collecting alms.” But when that
person questioned him three times, the Buddha said, “Whenever you see,
just see, whenever you hear, just hear, whenever you know, just know. You will
never exist in this world, and the next world, and the half-world and the next.”
That means that there is no person in seeing. Whenever you can observe pure
movement, there is no person. And that is why Buddha himself mentioned, “Just
sit, just hear, just speak or just walk.” It seems very absurd, doesn’t
it? But I think this is the essence of practice. Transcribed by
Grant Olson, used with permission.

"This humankind is attached to self-production
Or holds to production by another.
Those who have not understood this
Have not seen it as a dart.

But one who sees (this as it is),
Having drawn out the dart,
Does not think, 'I am the agent,'
Nor does she think, 'Another is the agent.'

This humankind is possessed by conceit,
Fettered by conceit, bound by conceit.
Speaking vindictively because of their views,
They do not go beyond samsara."

- Tatiyananatitthiya Sutta

.....

"With body steady and mind steady
Whether standing, sitting, or lying down,
A bhikkhu making this mindfulness firm
Shall obtain successive distinctions.
On obtaining distinctions in succession
He goes beyond sight of the King of Death."

.....

"For one who mindfully develops
Boundless loving-kindness
Seeing the destruction of clinging,
The fetters are worn away.
If with an uncorrupted mind
He pervades just one being
With loving kindly thoughts,
He makes some merit thereby.
But a noble one produces
An abundance of merit
By having a compassionate mind
Towards all living beings.
Those royal seers who conquered
The earth crowded with beings
Went about performing sacrifices:
The horse sacrifice, the man sacrifice,
The water rites, the soma sacrifice,
And that called "the Unobstructed."
But these do not share even a sixteenth part
Of a well cultivated mind of love,
Just as the entire starry host
Is dimmed by the moon's radiance.
One who does not kill
Nor cause others to kill,
Who does not conquer
Nor cause others to conquer,
Kindly towards all beings —
He has enmity for none."

~ Buddha, "The Udana and the Itivuttaka: Two Classics from the Pali Canon, translated by John D. Ireland"

When
the president of the United States says "America first," he is making
his voters happy. I can understand that. But from a global perspective,
this statement isn't relevant. Everything is interconnected today.

The
new reality is that everyone is interdependent with everyone else. The
United States is a leading nation of the free world. For this reason, I
call on its president to think more about global-level issues. There are
no national boundaries for climate protection or the global economy. No
religious boundaries, either. The time has come to understand that we
are the same human beings on this planet. Whether we want to or not, we
must coexist.

History
tells us that when people pursue only their own national interests,
there is strife and war. This is shortsighted and narrow-minded. It is
also unrealistic and outdated. Living together as brothers and sisters
is the only way to peace, compassion, mindfulness and more justice.

The time has come to understand that we are the same human beings on this planet. Whether we want to or not, we must coexist.

Share quote & link

Religion
can to a certain degree help to overcome division. But religion alone
will not be enough. Global secular ethics are now more important than
the classical religions. We need a global ethic that can accept both
believers and nonbelievers, including atheists.

My
wish is that, one day, formal education will pay attention to the
education of the heart, teaching love, compassion, justice, forgiveness,
mindfulness, tolerance and peace. This education is necessary, from
kindergarten to secondary schools and universities. I mean social,
emotional and ethical learning. We need a worldwide initiative for
educating heart and mind in this modern age.

At
present our educational systems are oriented mainly toward material
values and training one's understanding. But reality teaches us that we
do not come to reason through understanding alone. We should place
greater emphasis on inner values.

Intolerance
leads to hatred and division. Our children should grow up with the idea
that dialogue, not violence, is the best and most practical way to
solve conflicts. The young generations have a great responsibility to
ensure that the world becomes a more peaceful place for all. But this
can become reality only if we educate, not just the brain, but also the
heart. The educational systems of the future should place greater
emphasis on strengthening human abilities, such as warm-heartedness, a
sense of oneness, humanity and love.

I
see with ever greater clarity that our spiritual well-being depends not
on religion, but on our innate human nature — our natural affinity for
goodness, compassion and caring for others. Regardless of whether we
belong to a religion, we all have a fundamental and profoundly human
wellspring of ethics within ourselves. We need to nurture that shared
ethical basis.

Ethics,
as opposed to religion, are grounded in human nature. Through ethics,
we can work on preserving creation. Empathy is the basis of human
coexistence. It is my belief that human development relies on
cooperation, not competition. Science tells us this.

We
must learn that humanity is one big family. We are all brothers and
sisters: physically, mentally and emotionally. But we are still focusing
far too much on our differences instead of our commonalities. After
all, every one of us is born the same way and dies the same way.

The 14th
Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, is the spiritual leader of Tibet and a Nobel
laureate for peace. He wrote this op-ed with Franz Alt, a television
journalist and bestselling author. This piece is adapted from their new
book, "An Appeal to the World: The Way to Peace in a Time of Division."

GGSoh, so abiding as awareness is not entirely wrong. Actually it is fact. All is mind, mind is empty and aware.

"But
the mind is not just empty; while being empty, its characteristic, its
defining characteristic, is awareness. Therefore, when the mind is
described, terminology like the unity of cognitive lucidity and
emptiness or the unity of awareness and emptiness is used. Unity here is
meant very strongly. The nature of awareness is emptiness, and the
nature of the mind's emptiness is awareness."

Many
people (myself included, Thusness included) having realized the I AM
would think that the final state/Nirvana is the state of effortless and
permanent abidance in the Self, in other words moving from Savikalpa to
Nirvikalpa samadhi.

However as we progress in the
path, we realize that effortlessness comes not with abiding (that would
still be effortful and has to do with your degree of mastery in
concentration/abiding in what is deemed as the purest state of Presence)
with the deepening of insights into non-dual, anatta, and shunyata. At
that point, Presence-Awareness is felt everywhere, as everything,
without center, circumference, point of reference, without any attempt
needed to abide because it is seen that there is no 'purest state of
Presence' to abide in/as. I AM is not more I AM (not more special or
ultimate) than a sound! A scent! A sight! Transience reveals itself as
non-dual (without subject-object, observer-observed dichotomy)
presence-awareness. This is the beginning of non-dual insight and
effortlessness - complete effortlessness comes with the maturation of
this non-dual insight into anatta and shunyata.

So
it is important to progress to further insights from I AM, is to first
focus on the four aspects of I AM, then non-dual, ...etc. Even if you
attain mastery of samadhi and achieve Nirvikalpa Samadhi (permanent
abidance as Self), still, further insights that allows full
effortlessness is not revealed, unless further investigations are
undertaken.

I had, what I think you refer here to as anatta insight, a month or so ago, and it is still maturing.It
was as if one step further or deeper was performed, it was as if the
Nondual experiences from before "expanded" even further and left "me"
completely and utterly without the Self (anatma or anatta). Liberating
as two hells. LOL

I can enter almost at will now into this state, usually via some koan or sutra (heart sutra for example).

Question, if I may:when
is this insight mature, when to go on? (ok, I know, it is a strange
question to ask, but I would love to hear your experiences, please)How and what did you do to go from Nondual to Anatta to Sunyata insights, please?

I
was reading the text on integral psychotherapy and transpersonal
identity development, and while reading the notions about the Nondual,
it happened.Those notions are worth mentioning, I think:in Kashmir Shivaism, they outline ancient guidelines about obstacles to ultimate reality, so called malas (impurities):- anava mala (belief that any given person occupies particular space, i.e. I am here not there, and certainly not everywhere)- mayiya mala (belief that there are other objects outside of us, i.e. Jane is out there, not here where I am located)Basically that is the root perception of false ego, the illusory center of reference.

By
that time, Nondual was already here (only seeing the seen, hearing the
sound etc...), it seems the first two malas were recognized as false
straight away.

It is important to note that I was at
that point able to switch back to "I am" presence, perceiving the well
known Omnipresence of my True self. For years I entered this state at
will, hence falling back to the "I am" presence was happening, I guess.

It
was different this time, however: I realized with the so called aha!
moment, that the I am presence is exactly the same as the "sensory
input" I was experiencing. The seen, sensed, cognized AS the "I am"
presence - only that "I am" presence was not there anymore. I was
however, able to switch, back and forth, so to speak. Maybe it is worth
mentioning that the Nondual was/is (still is) more liberating and
peaceful than "I am" presence insight.

What sealed the deal, so to speak LOL, was:-
karma mala - belief that a person must perform an action, do something
to remedy any given situation, say "I need to meditate to get
enlightened"It happened few moments after I read that
notion, and everything just became crystal clear, no switching back to
"I am" presence, there was no one here, there, anywhere to switch to!!
And I am not talking only about the little false ego, I am also talking
about the ultimate "I am" presence! For years, I was happy to abide as a
Witness, Omnipresent and liberated, free from mental/emotional/physical
bullshit.

But now, the "I am" presence was gone!!
Even the so called Unmanifested "I am" was nowhere to be found (the
Causal level has two sub-levels, lower (I am presence, the Witness) and
higher (No "I am", just the Unmanifested, latent absolute potential),
according to Wilber).

It seems that after years of entering satori at will, I was allowed to move on.Only
there isn't anyone to give the permission, or anyone to be allowed to
move on. No one is here, it never was, it can not exist, because events
are unfolding by their own, on their own. Phenomena is free, separated
from every other phenomena, not touching but liberating as they come and
go.

I can enter into Nondual at will now,
especially after the shared experience. Driving the car, eating, looking
out the window - it seems that these situations are easy and do not
require much mental effort on my part, so I can easily let go.What I also notice now is that I can discern the Advaita texts from the Nondual ones.

To
my saddness, I realized that my favorite master, Sri Ramana Maharshi,
is not speaking about Anatta, or not even about Nondual (as far as I can
see), He mentions that even in Sahaja Nirbikalpa Samadhi (the ultimate
state, according to Him) there is "something" there which mediator is at
One with. Well, He must be talking about something different, not about
Anatta or Nondual.

Anatta I can enter almost at
will now, but it usually just slips back to the Nondual insight, with
slight resemblance of something here, traces or tendencies from years of
"I am" presence samadhis, I guess.

"An Eternal Now:What
is your view about what consciousness is now? Does consciousness have
any characteristics of being unchanging, independent or etc and if not
what is it?"

Well, now I view consciousness as
non-local, not centered in the "I am presence" anymore, there is no
split between samadhi and everyday life, in a sense that there is no one
to make that distinction. I am more at peace now, more at ease, laid
back so to speak.

Yes, at the moment, I see the
consciousness as something free, liberating in itself, "changing" by
itself: events come and go by themselves, no one is in control, so to
speak, no one to instigate coming and going, not even God.And,
I promise you, for me this notion ( there is no God, as a separate
entity or Absolute Self etc... )is rather dramatic change.

I
am still not clear why events or phenomena are perceived as coming and
going. What is condition ("yuan" as per Thusness) for events to occur?
What is yuan?

"An Eternal Now:

How
stable is your non dual experiencing now? Also I presume you have read
Thusness's articles in our blog? One more thing: any changes in your
sleep and dream?"

I have read most of Thusness' articles at your blog, yes. But I don't get everything yet, especially about the Sunyata insights.

How
stable is my Nondual experiencing now? I don't know what is the
criteria for stability, but I can enter Nondual at will, it is easiest
to do, as there is no effort needed (apart from letting go) or something
gained. When everything is let go of, the Nondual remains, not as a
state or level, but as base reality. No need to do anything, as it
already and alone is.All of this, it is not spontaneous yet, though.

It is interesting you should mention sleep (dreamless one, I suppose) and dreams.

Lucid dreaming is an important part of my sadhana, I have been dreaming lucidly (on and off) for years.The
change I am noticing for a few years is that all three states (waking,
dreams and dreamless sleep) are happening to Me, the base Reality, they
are happening in Me, so to speak (actually, everything else, everything,
is happening in Me, as a part of my Being). Even in dreaming I am aware
of this, not as in classic lucid dreaming sense but more profound. It
is like common denominator, silver lining in all three states, so to
speak.Does that make any sense, pls?

But now even this has changed as I know beyond the shadow of the doubt that there is no Me as the base reality.It is a process, I think, so I look forward to experiencing new insights.

Good
insights there Seraphis! You seem able to actualize the living
experience of anatta without dwelling much into view. Your insights
unfold from recognizing "the same taste" of I AM in all six entries and
exits, into seeing that the very idea of
abiding is a hindrance, to the doubtless realization that there never
was a "This I" to abide in, and whatever arises is already free and
liberating.

There are similarities with my
experience but somewhat different triggers. I had an intense non-dual
experience (Aug '10) when dancing at a nightclub that totally dissolved
the Witness for a few days (after which I was switching between I AM and
non-dual for a period of time due to previous practice tendencies like
you until clearer insights), before this event non-dual glimpses was
occassional, few, short and intermittent but after this event I was able
to 'switch' into non-dual mode with relative ease as my insight into
Awareness/Existence was refined from "I AM pure Existence" to "Existence
is the very stuff of whatever arises". Soon I was also contemplating
and challenging the sense of subject-object, inside-outside, border and
boundaries of awareness and manifestation, etc until it was all seen as
seamless awareness (one mind). Then non-dual was pretty clear to me.
Later during October 2010 I wrote two articles in reference to my
insights, first on One Taste and then it was contemplating on the Bahiya
Sutta about a week later that triggered the clear insight into
anatta/"No I": http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2010/10/one-taste.html and http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/.../my-commentary... .

I
am not in any perceived. There is no perceiver. All of the perceived is
no other than me. Sounds paradoxal, I know. Its like the dream of
appearances is never other than the dreamer, but there is no dreamer
either.

"In
many of your recent posts after the sudden realization of anatta from
contemplating on Bahiya Sutta, you are still very much focused on the
vivid non-dual presence. Now the everything feels ‘Me’ sort of sensation
becomes a daily matter and the bliss of losing oneself completely into
scenery, sound, taste is wonderful. This is different from everything
collapsing into a “Single Oneness” sort of experience but a disperse out
into the multiplicity of whatever arises. Everything feels closer than
‘me’ due to gaplessness. ...."

Therefore
to see that all dusts are primordially pure from before beginning is
the whole purpose of maturing the insight of anatta. The following text
succinctly expresses this insight:

...According
to Dogen, this “oceanic-body” does not contain the myriad forms, nor is
it made up of myriad forms – it is the myriad forms themselves. The same
instruction is provided at the beginning of Shobogenzo, Gabyo (pictured
rice-cakes) where, he asserts that, “as all Buddhas are enlightenment”
(sho, or honsho), so too, “all dharmas are enlightenment” which he says
does not mean they are simply “one” nature or mind.

Anything
falling short of this realization cannot be said to be Buddhist's
enlightenment and it is also what your Taiwanese teacher Chen wanted you
to be clear when he spoke of the "equality of dharma" as having an
initial glimpse of anatta will not result in practitioners seeing that
phenomena are themselves primoridally pure."

Soh Wei YuMahamudra has a similar teaching as Dogen on 'multiplicity':

"The medium One Taste is when this tarnish has dissolved:the conviction of savoring and clinging to multiplicityas being one taste. You have actualized the resplendentindivisibility of perceptions and mind in which theperceived is not held as being outside and mind is not heldas being inside.

The greater One Taste is when you realize multiplicityas being of one taste and you experience one taste as beingmultiplicity. Thus, everything subsides into the originalstate of equality."

"You have perfected the strength of One Taste if whateveryou encounter is experienced as the expression of thisoriginal state of equality. You have not perfected itsstrength if one taste isn't experienced as multiplicity becauseof retaining the bind of a remedy."

André A. Pais
André A. Pais GG what's the referent of the word "me" when you say it's all me?

If it is a single oneness, how can stuff disappear without collapsing the "whole"?
1
Manage
Like
· Reply · 11h
GG
GG I cant refer to "it". Its meaning is close to "tasting the temperature of the water". Probably similar to "one taste".

Good point. Also stuff appear without altering the whole, although one could say that empty forms dont alter anything. But that is too intellectual.
Manage
Like
· Reply · 8h
GG
GG Strictly speaking any "me" should inherently bring with it some "no-me", so it just doesnt make sense indeed. How could such no-me coexist with a "all-is-me"?
Manage
Like
· Reply · 8h · Edited
GG
GG But now I can counter argument my own statement and say that arisings and desapearings in a dream does not alter the wholeness of the dream. Likewise, with empty forms and what is. What will you say to that?
Manage
Like
· Reply · 7h · Edited
André A. Pais
André A. Pais GG the wholeness of the dream is likewise imputed. There is no single, whole or unified dreaming mind, but mere scattered luminous appearances, causally interdependent, but "free-flowing".
1
Manage
Like
· Reply · 12m
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu There
is no "one weather" or even a "weather" besides the everchanging
patterns, which does function seamlessly in interdependence and dynamic
and boundless activity/functioning (not as one 'substance' -- there is no unchanging
or independent substantial essence).

Just like there is no "one whole Chariot" -- "Chariot" is merely designated in dependence on parts, conditions/conditionality, function, designating consciousness.

Therefore "one mind" collapses (or rather is simply 'seen through') into multiplicity in a similar fashion as the 'weather' and 'chariot' analogy - into the five aggregates, the eighteen elements. This is the insight that must arise.

Zen priest Alex Weith:

"...The next step that I found very practical is to push the process of deconstruction a step further, realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness. In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, not solid material objects, but only six streams of sensory experiences. The seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle thougths like absorbtion states, jhanas)..."
Manage
Like
· Reply · 1m · Edited
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu And this is also why a universal consciousness does not exist.

Loppon Namdrol/Malcolm: "Buddhism is all its forms is strictly nominalist, and rejects all universals (samanya-artha) as being unreal abstractions."
Manage
Like
· Reply · 4m
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu Why now do you assume 'a being'? Mara, have you grasped a view? This is a heap of sheer constructions: Here no being is found. Just as, with an assemblage of parts, The word 'chariot' is used, So, when the aggregates are present, There's the convention 'a being.' It's only suffering that comes to be, Suffering that stands and falls away. Nothing but suffering comes to be, Nothing but suffering ceases.

“Bhikkhus, I will teach you the All. Listen, attend carefully to it and I will speak.

“Now what, Bhikkhus, is the All? It is
just the eye and visible objects, the ear and sounds, the nose and
odors, the tongue and tastes, the body and tangible objects, the mind
and objects of mind. This, Bhikkhus, is called the All.

“Now whoever should speak thus: ’Setting
aside this All I will proclaim another All,’ it would be mere talk on
his part and on being questioned he would be unable to proceed and in
addition, vexation will befall him. For what reason? It would not be
within his scope, Bhikkhus.

- Buddha
Manage
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 8m

Soh Wei YuIt
is the seamless, boundless, interdependence of dharmas that some Zen
masters talk about 'one body' but not as an unchanging substance
independent of conditionality.

Zen Master Bernie Glassman:

"In
the same way, we usually see the body as a limited, bound thing, yet we
know that it has many features -- hands, toes, numerous hairs and pores
(all different), skin, bones, blood, guts, an assortment of organs,
many feet of intestines. But they're all just one body with many, many
features and characteristics. Hit one part and the whole feels it; the
entire body is affected. Eat some food and what part is not affected?
Breathe, what part is not affected?"

Thusness, 2012:

"In primordial suchness, mind-body-universe is one and act as one flow but not one substance"